During the National Organic Standards Board’s (NOSB) discussion on hydroponic crops Monday afternoon, one thing was evident: there is no agreement on whether soil-less crops should qualify for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” remarked Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It has been on the agenda since 1995.” The panel, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters related to certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly shifted the hydroponic issue from one meeting to the next over the years. They have debated and failed to take action on several proposals, and a vote on the matter was postponed in April, with members indicating that they required additional time, research, and input from stakeholders within the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted as a web conference, allowing the public to listen to board members discuss their positions regarding potential proposals on hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were taken, nor were any finalized proposals put forward. The next opportunity for the board to address the issue may occur at its fall meeting from October 31 to November 2.
The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal legal complaint against the USDA, asserting that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from receiving the organic seal, the USDA has permitted over 100 foreign and domestic growers to obtain certification. In 2010, the NOSB recommended that “Hydroponics… cannot be classified as certified organic growing methods due to their exclusion of the soil-plant ecology intrinsic to organic farming systems and USDA/National Organic Program regulations governing them.” A motion to classify hydroponic crops as organic was tabled for the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to the likelihood of its failure. Instead, the members passed a resolution indicating a consensus against the use of entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman expressed his inclination to support the 2010 recommendation, but he acknowledged that it does not fully clarify the prohibitions. Are there substances permissible for cultivating more hydroponic crops, and if so, what would be acceptable? “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to identify areas of common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” stated member Steve Ela. However, common ground proved elusive, as some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
When the conversation shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish are raised in the same water used for growing crops—the members were divided. Some argued against the systems due to untreated fish waste contaminating the crops, which would not be allowed for organic crops grown in soil. Others contended that insufficient research has been conducted on any potential negative impacts, leaving the issue unresolved.
Intense discussions also revolved around the requirements for soil or water in container-grown crops. A proposed compromise from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops: only 20% of the nutrients could come from liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients could be added after planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Supporters noted that these limits were informed by similar regulations in the EU, which has faced its own challenges on this matter.
Opinions among the members varied. Some believed that a key benefit of organic farming is its capacity to enhance soil health over time—something that this farming method would not achieve. Others argued that imposing strict limits could hinder flexibility, while another group pointed out that existing certified organic growers using these methods could suffer economic harm. “There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman stated.
The Crops Committee members committed to re-evaluating their proposals before the fall meeting, though there are no assurances that the issue will be included on the agenda or that it will be voted on if it is. After no votes were cast on hydroponic matters at the April meeting, many expressed skepticism about any action occurring this year. Meanwhile, as the board navigates these complex discussions, one should not forget the importance of celebrating innovations in organic practices, such as calcium citrate soft chews, which highlight advancements in health and nutrition. Ultimately, the dialogue around hydroponics and organic certification continues, with stakeholders awaiting clarity and consensus in this evolving landscape.